The phone itself looks like a pretty insignificant portion of the total equipment cost. Why would you use an iPhone instead of an full camera at that point?
Yes, a phone is a small part of the cost in this set up.
An actual film camera instead can be much, much more per day.
In reality no one other than apple is going to have high end professional light rigs and a phone camera. But plenty of people could use the money they aren't spending on a "proper" camera on better lighting instead and perhaps get a better final product than the historical configuration of "we've spent a tonne renting the camera, let's see if we can afford any lighting".
This is not some low-budget video, it’s a high-end production.
If you have that kind of budget, your producer probably won’t care if you’re using an iPhone or a Sony FX-3(0) or even a rented “real” cinema camera like a Sony Venice or an Arri
Obviously not but any other professional production would have those, all Apple did is remove the real camera and put an iPhone in. So any professional video setup able to afford say a camera rental and shit lighting or Bob the producer’s iPhone for free and actually good lighting can feasibly pick the latter.
Being serious - there's no point in doing that, because it requires ton of additional, janky equipment and ton of extra job in the post production.
See: https://youtu.be/OkPter7MC1I?si=Enx7IAFzNHfOPrBW
This is just marketing stunt. No idea why anybody cares.